Google News Provides Access to Bombshell about Google

September 9, 2022

I thought that the Google had a news deal of some type with the GOOG and its news service. If you are not familiar with Google News (the ad free thing for many years) is available at this link. Google News included a story called “Google Pays ‘Enormous’ Sums to Maintain Search-Engine Dominance, DOJ Says.” Now this is not news here in Harrod’s Creek. Isn’t a modest payment provided to the people’s friend Apple to provide search results? Maybe? Maybe not?

What I find interesting is that locating the story on Google News required using the string “Google Search Engine Dominance.” [Note: This may require a payment to read unless one views the story via Google News. Maybe Google and Bloomberg have a special operation underway? Gee, I don’t know.] Other queries were less helpful. Interesting? Nah. Just the black box of Google News search working its magic. (Maybe that’s why Google Dorks are so darned popular among certain analysts and research-minded individuals. The information is in Google, but it can require a few cartwheels to locate in my experience.)

What was the main point of this Bloomberg story. (When I think of Bloomberg, I do associate the company with the chips on motherboards which phone home. Was this story accurate, true, grounded in verifiable data, or a confection like some social media mavens output? Again I don’t know. As I get older, I realize I don’t know much, if anything.)

The Bloomberg Google story on Google News says:

Alphabet Inc.’s Google pays billions of dollars each year to Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. and other telecom giants to illegally maintain its spot as the No. 1 search engine, the US Justice Department told a federal judge Thursday [September 8, 2022].

News flash. This is not news. What is mildly interesting is that the US government after decades of finding joy in Google mouse pads, T shirts, and other tchotchkes is sort of investigating. (Why was it so darned difficult to get French income tax forms to come up in Google search results? Were those cranky folks at Foundem blowing smoke? You know the answer: I don’t know.

The write up continues:

“Google invests billions in defaults, knowing people won’t change them,” Dintzer told Judge Amit Mehta during a hearing in Washington that marked the first major face-off in the case and drew top DOJ antitrust officials and Nebraska’s attorney general among the spectators. “They are buying default exclusivity because defaults matter a lot.” Google’s contracts form the basis of the DOJ’s landmark antitrust lawsuit, which alleges the company has sought to maintain its online search monopoly in violation of antitrust laws.

Okay, written contracts. That’s something sort of concrete I suppose.

In my opinion, the best line in the Google story on Google News from good and friendly Bloomberg is this one:

“Default exclusivity allows Google to systemically deny rivals’ data,” he said.

If true, does this mean that former Googler Eric Schmidt was off base when he said that fear of Qwant was keeping him awake at night?

Probably not. But Google seems to have been taking steps to reduce the probability of Qwant or any other search engine gaining traction somewhat seriously. Does Google know its search system is only useful when one masters the machinations of the Dorkers?

Again: I don’t know.

Stephen E Arnold, September 9, 2022

Google: Adulting Becomes a Thing

September 8, 2022

My goodness, it has taken more than 20 years for the Backrub-inspired search and ad company to embrace adulting. This term takes a noun like adult and converts it to a verb. This English trick is one that thrills English as a Second Language students. What I am going to do is equate “adulting” with the management precepts of Peter Drucker. Now you see why figuring out what I am saying and not saying is so darned unusual.

First, however, we need some context. That estimable source of real news (Fox) published this story: “Google CEO Sundar Pichai Looking to Improve Tech Giant’s Efficiency.” The Big Dog of the Google is participating in explainers to the tech worshipers that the time is now for adulting. The idea is that the Google is under pressure from several different hypercube vectors; for example:

  1. The lovable and enlightened Amazon with its newfound clicks from product search and a corresponding surge in product related advertising
  2. That affable crowd in Cupertino who are taking steps to make sure the walled garden does not allow Googzilla too much room in which to cause mischief
  3. Those with-it regulators and elected officials in governments near and far who don’t understand how making money on ads as the saloon swinging door with a charge to come in and leave works for the benefit of anyone except the Google
  4. Wizards who find themselves orthogonal to Google’s personnel postures. Yep, Dr. Timnit Gebru et al. “Disagree and Begone” could become a new Xoogler T shirt for diversity conference attendees
  5. Technical debt, which — despite Google’s mostly not talking about it — continues to incur some hefty costs. One can fire people but one cannot do much more than sell data center gear on eBay or Swappa
  6. High school management methods. I have explained this concept in previous posts so use the search box and read the explanation, please. The new idea is that the best high school science club members will not want to work at the Google. Yikes. Regressing toward the mean maybe?

What did the Big Dog say is the future of Google?

One big point is that the 20 percent frittered away on the dorm notion of one day a week of other stuff is over. Now Googlers have to work like a person on the Ford assembly line in 1937. Punch in, do stuff that matters, and punch out. No output, no pay. Simple. I remember reading that programmers write code about 30 minutes a day. What are these wizards going to do in the other 7.5 hours? Well, Foosball, table tennis, and volleyball may be difficult when the kid toys are removed. Google is a place for real work. What is that work? Well, Google doesn’t explain too much, but I assume it is quantifiable, good for humankind, fair, equitable, and unbiased just like Snorkel automated training data.

Another point is that the new Google sets priorities. I think priorities are useful. Why have a couple dozen messaging apps and smart software that displays ads totally unrelated to either the content of a YouTube video or to the interests of a Google customer who pays for Google services? I suppose Google has given up on solving death, which, as I understood the project, was a priority.

I also noted that Google is moving more slowly. My experience suggests that what went quickly was work blessed by the senior management. Some employees are left to their own devices to learn how Google works, snag a project, and produce something that makes money. In order to set priorities, one has to do the Drucker type work. Is that type of thinking in the Google incentive plan?

To sum up: Google is in danger of having to face life as an ageing sled dog or arthritic Googzilla. Maybe some of the “solve death” research can rejuvenate the behemoth before the snow piles up and Googzilla moves even more slowly.

Stephen E Arnold, September 8, 2022

Google: More Management Mysteries

September 6, 2022

I read a somewhat odd article about Google in the New York Times. That’s a newspaper, not a Harvard Business Review? Sorry. The world of “real journalists” has embraced the wonkiness of management gurus and Drukerism.

The article which caught my attention was named by someone — possibly a really busy editor — “Google Employee Who Played Key Role in Protest of Contract with Israel Quits.” The idea that an individual who accepts pay in return for work does not like a corporation’s direction is becoming a thing, a trend. The idea is that a company pays a person and that person gets to alter the direction in which a decision is heading.

Yeah, okay.

From my point of view, the person who accepts money to work at a company, presumably eight or more hours a day, has several options:

  1. Just quit. Hunt for a new job. This is a good solution.
  2. Keep quiet. Do the work. Cash the check or look at the bank balance in an online only bank app.
  3. Work harder, get promoted, and earn a position and responsibility so that one’s ideas can influence colleagues. This is a better solution.

The newspaper article skips these ideas and focuses on the actions taken by the employee. The implicit idea is that the employee’s approach to a problem was just wonderful. The company’s response to these actions was inappropriate, ill advised, and stupid.

Maybe Google’s approach to management is different from what someone of my age expects?

The one point in the article which struck me as significant was:

… Google had tried to retaliate against her for her activism.

The retaliation point is one that warrants more development. The newspaper article could have been boiled down to 150 words. The MBA- / the-big-tech-outfit-is bad angle could have been expanded, explained, and analyzed in an HBR-type of write up or a law review-type analysis.

What I perceive is a newspaper trying to to something its is not geared up to do well. Is the Google perfect? Nah. Do I think this situation reveals a facet of the online ad outfit which is troubling?

Absolutely.

Both the employee and the company could have been more old fashioned, which then would not have been “real news.”

That’s a problem.

Stephen E Arnold, September 6, 2022

UK Pundit Chops at the Google Near Its Palatine Raphe

September 6, 2022

I read “Google’s Image-Scanning Illustrates How Tech Firms Can Penalise the Innocent.” The write up is an opinion piece, and I am not sure whether the ideas expressed in the essay are appropriate for my Harrod’s Creek ethos.

The write up states:

The background to this is that the tech platforms have, thankfully, become much more assiduous at scanning their servers for child abuse images. But because of the unimaginable numbers of images held on these platforms, scanning and detection has to be done by machine-learning systems, aided by other tools (such as the cryptographic labelling of illegal images, which makes them instantly detectable worldwide). All of which is great. The trouble with automated detection systems, though, is that they invariably throw up a proportion of “false positives” – images that flag a warning but are in fact innocuous and legal.

Yep, false positives from Google’s smart software.

Do these types of errors become part of the furniture of living? Does Google have a duty to deal with disagreements in a transparent manner? Does Google’s smart software care about problems caused by those who consume Google advertising?

It strikes me that the UK will be taking a closer look at the fascinating palatine raphe, probably in one of those nifty UK jurisprudence settings: Wigs, big words, and British disdain. Advertising, privacy, and false positives. I say, “The innocent!”

Stephen E Arnold, September 6, 2022

Google and Security: The Google Play Protect Situation

September 1, 2022

Unfortunately for Android users, Google’s default app-security program is not the safest bet. A write-up at News Patrolling explores “Why Google Play Protect Fails to Identify Malicious Apps.” A few points are obvious—Google cannot help users who turn the feature off, for example, or those who install software from other sources. The company also lacks Apple’s advantage of controlling both hardware and software. That does not explain, however, why third-party tools from AhnLab to Trend Micro outperform Play Protect. Reporter Satya Prakash observes:

  • New kid on the block – As compared to other security software platforms that have been in existence for decades, Google Play Protect was launched in 2017. While it’s true that Google can hire the best security experts, it may still take some time for Google Play Protect to achieve the same level of security as offered by private software platforms. …
  • Too many apps and devices – There are around 3 million apps on Google Play and several thousands are added almost every day. Combine that with thousands of different types of smartphones, having different Android versions. Apparently, it’s a massive task to be able to fix security vulnerabilities that may be present in each of these cases.
  • Reliance on automated systems – Due to huge number of apps and devices, Google relies on automated systems to detect harmful behavior. Private security firms use the same approach, but apparently, they are doing a much better job. Hackers are constantly looking for new security vulnerabilities that can be exploited. This makes the job tougher for Google Play Protect.”

Happily, there are many stronger alternatives as tested by AV-Test. Their list is worth a look-see for Android users who care about security. A comparison to last year’s results shows Play Protect has actually improved a bit. Perhaps someday it will perform as well in its own app store as its third-party competition.

Cynthia Murrell, September 1, 2022

Here We Go Again: Google Claims To Improve Search Results

August 31, 2022

Google has been blamed for biased search results for years. Users claim that Google pushes paid links to the top of search results without identifying them Organic search results are consigned to the second and third pages. Despite having a monopoly on search and other parts of the tech sector, Google does deliver decent services and products. To maintain its market dominance, Google must continue offering good services. Engadget explores how “Google’s Search AI Now Looks For General Consensus To Highlight More Trustworthy Results.”

Google wants it “search snippets, “blocks of text that appear at the top of search results to answer questions,” to be more accurate. Google designed the Multitask Unified Model AI to search for consensus when selecting a snippet. The AI checks snippets against verified resources to determine a consensus of information. Some queries, such as false premises, should not have snippets, so Google’s AI reduces those by 40%.

Also Google is showing more citations:

“Google is now also making its “About this result” tool more accessible. That’s the panel that pops up when you click on the three dots next to a result, showing you details about the source website before you even visit. Starting later this year, it will be available in eight more languages, including Portuguese, French, Italian, German, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, and Indonesian. It’s adding more information to the tool starting this week, as well, including how widely a publication is circulated, online reviews about a company, or whether a company is owned by another entity. They’re all pieces of information that could help you decide whether a particular source is trustworthy.”

Google search results with limited returns or do not have verified sources will contain content advisories encouraging users to conduct further research.

It is great that Google is turning itself into an academic database, now if they would only do that for Google Scholar.

Whitney Grace, August 31, 2022

Libraries and Google: Who Wins?

August 31, 2022

Google uses various ways to protect users’ accounts, such as authentication through a mobile phone or non-Gmail address. This is a problem for large portions of the American population who don’t have regular access to the Internet. These include ethnic minorities, people with low socioeconomic status, and the elderly. These groups usually rely on public libraries for Internet access. These groups also need welfare and other assistance programs for survival.

Shelly R., a librarian in the Free Library of Philadelphia System, wrote a letter to Google in 2021 about how their security authentication hurts these groups. The letter was picked up by Hacker News and it was meant to be private. Her description of the services her library system provides is typical of many places in the United States.

People say that libraries are obsolete, but the naysayers are not taking into account the people that need Internet access, help with technology literacy, applying for benefits and jobs, and more. Librarians have one of the most stressful jobs in the country, because they are forced into more roles than helping people research: teacher, therapist, babysitter, and more. It is ridiculous the amount of roles librarians fill, however, helping people in their community get access to technology is one thing they excel at.

Shelly R. makes a valiant point that many groups cannot afford expensive technology or know how to use it. They rely on community resources such as the public library for assistance, but security features like Google’s authentication system do not help them.

Online accounts must remain secure to protect users, but people without regular Internet access or technology literacy must be taken into account as well. The Internet is supposed to be a great equalizer, but it does not work when everyone does not have equal access.

Shelly R. updated the letter in August 2022, said she spoke with Google’s security team, and things were better for her job. Is that true? We hope so. If only Google would do more to help equalize Internet access. Hey Google, maybe you could donate money or resources to public libraries? You have the power and ability to do so, plus it would be a tax write-off.

Whitney Grace, August 31, 2022

Google Management: If True, a New Term Gains Currency

August 29, 2022

Caste bias. That’s a bound phrase with which I was not familiar. I grew up in Illinois, and when I was a wee lad in Illinois by the river gently flowing, castes and biases were not on my radar. Flash forward 77 years, and the concept remains outside the lingo of some people who live in Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky.

Google Scrapped a Talk on Caste Bias Because Some Employees Felt It Was “Anti Hindu”, if accurate, provides another glimpse of the Google’s difficult situation with regard to different ethnicities, religions and cults, and other factors which humanoids manifest.

The issue of management is a tricky one. Google, as I pointed out in The Google Legacy (Infonortics Ltd, 2004), Google is a company with non traditional management methods. These embraced settling an intellectual property misunderstanding with Yahoo related to advertising systems and methods, permitting a wide range of somewhat adolescent behaviors such as sleeping in bean bags and playing Foosball at work, and ignoring some of the more interesting behaviors super duper wizards demonstrate as part of their equipment for living.

The cited Quartz India article states:

“I cannot find the words to express just how traumatic and discriminatory Google’s actions were towards its employees and myself…” Soundararajan [the terminated speaker who is executive director of the US-based social justice organization Equality Labs] said in the press release.

The Google wizard charged with explaining the termination of the lecture allegedly said:

While noting that caste discrimination had “no place” at Google, Shannon Newberry, Google’s spokesperson, said in a statement to The Washington Post, “We also made the decision to not move forward with the proposed talk which—rather than bringing our community together and raising awareness—was creating division and rancor.”

Observations? I would like to offer three:

  1. Who in charge at the Google? Does this individual harbor some biases? My experience suggests that it is very difficult for an individual to step outside of the self and judge in an objective manner what behaviors could trigger such remarkable management decisions, explanations, and reversals.
  2. The lingo used to explain the incident strikes me as classic Sillycon Valley: A statement designed not to address the core issue.
  3. I wonder how Dr. Timnit Gebru interprets the management decision making for the allegedly true Quartz described incident.

Yep, just part of the Google Legacy. “Caste bias” plus accompanying Google babble in my opinion.

Stephen E Arnold, August 29, 2022

Google: Errors Are Not Possible… Mostly

August 29, 2022

In my upcoming talk for a US government law enforcement meeting, I talk about some of the issues associated with wonky smart software. I spotted a fantastic example of one quasi-alleged monopoly deals with tough questions about zippy technology.

As I understand “Google Refuses to Reinstate Man’s Account after He Took Medical Images of Son’s Groin,” an online ad company does not make errors… mostly. The article, which appeared in a UK newspaper, stated:

Google has refused to reinstate a man’s account after it wrongly flagged medical images he took of his son’s groin as child sexual abuse material…

The Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind entity has sophisticated AI/ML (artificial intelligence/machine learning) systems which flag inappropriate content. Like most digital watch dogs, zeros and ones are flawless… mostly even though Google humans help out the excellent software. The article reports:

When the photos were automatically uploaded to the cloud, Google’s system identified them as CSAM. Two days later, Mark’s Gmail and other Google accounts, including Google Fi, which provides his phone service, were disabled over “harmful content” that was “a severe violation of the company’s policies and might be illegal”, the Times reported, citing a message on his phone. He later found out that Google had flagged another video he had on his phone and that the San Francisco police department opened an investigation into him. Mark was cleared of any criminal wrongdoing, but Google has said it will stand by its decision.

The cited article quotes a person from the US American Civil Liberty Union, offering this observation:

“These systems can cause real problems for people.”

Several observations:

  1. Google is confident its smart software works; thus, Google is correct in its position on this misunderstanding.
  2. The real journalists and the father who tried to respond to a medical doctor to assist his son are not Googley; that is, their response to the fabulous screening methods will not be able to get hired at the Alphabet Google YouTube Alphabet construct as full time employees or contractors.
  3. The online ad company and would be emulator or TikTok provides many helpful services. Those services allow the company to control information flows to help out everyone every single day.
  4. More color for this uplifting story can be found here.

Net net: Mother Google is correct… mostly. That’s why the Google timer is back online. Just click here. The company cares… mostly.

Stephen E Arnold, August 23, 2022

Google Outages: The Logic of a Quasi Monopoly

August 24, 2022

I read “Google Search Goes Down Around the World, Chaos Ensues.” In today’s world, I am not certain that a quasi monopoly’s technical shortcomings cause chaos. Anger, frustration, and confusion, yes. Chaos already exists in a number of high profile activities; for example, air plane luggage handling, medicines which don’t work as advertised on cable TV, and self driving vehicles. The write up states about one outage:

Google Search went down in dozens of countries. Other Google services, like Google Maps, were affected too.

Then:

The outage followed an “electrical incident” earlier in the day at a Google data center in Council Bluffs, Iowa, according to local media and SFGate. The incident critically injured three electricians around midday Iowa time. One person was flown to a nearby hospital and the other two were transported by ambulance.

Now here is the sentence which made the logic of quasi monopolies clear to me and probably no one else in the world, including the 150,000 or so Googlers laboring in the vineyards of truth and advertising revenue:

A Google spokesperson, however, told CNET that the two incidents were unrelated.

Er, one company is the glue that connects the two events. Thus, in my opinion, the one company has failed twice and the events are related: Corporate DNA does not infuse just the Mountain View folks. Everyone has the chemical magic if not the technical skills to demonstrate that technical debt is now too burdensome to address in an effective way. Focus, right?

Stephen E Arnold, August 24, 2022

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta